equal work for equal pay

Equal Work for Equal Pay
Name
Institution Affiliation
Introduction
Despite the numerous efforts by human rights activists, discrimination in the form of race, gender, religion, and appearance continues to be a serious issue in the modern society. More so, wage discrimination has been a significant challenge the world has been battling as to ensure that women are not discriminated in workplaces in terms of pay as they play an equal social and political role just as men. Women should have equal work for equal pay not only because they are entitled to it, but also because they have knowledge and expertise to reinforce their position in the workforce. This essay demonstrates why wage injustices against women are unacceptable and illegal in this day in age by reviewing the Utilitarian and Kant’s rules and principles. Furthermore, it provides an overview of why to the same extent the wage discrimination is reasonable.
Explanation and Demonstration of Moral Reasoning
Women deserve an equal work for equal pay as it is a right and it is not confined to the minority. Women have rights which entitle them to fair and just treatment. The fair treatment should not only be applied to the duties they perform but also to the wages they get after performing these duties. It is unfair to treat women as minors in workplaces during hiring, screening, promotion, or compensation based on something they cannot control. Based on the utilitarian principle, wage discrimination on women may affect her happiness.

Hence, to determine the general happiness of a female employee, an employer has to consider her happiness and pain in terms of pleasures and pains. The pain a female employee can suffer as a result of pay discrimination includes a fall in self-development opportunity, deterioration of health, and to some extent, her skills may turn obsolete. When we consider the wage discrimination on women from a larger perspective using the utilitarian rule, we find that the wage discrimination against one female employee has an overhaul effect on the attitude of working mothers and this may affect the overall loyalty and efficiency of an organization. Ideally, it is a right and not a preference for women to get equal work for equal pay.
Women are entitled to equal work for equal pay as they have knowledge, skills, and expertise to reinforce their positions at work. Although the brains of males and females are different, each has their strengths and weaknesses. The fact that men are better at learning and performing skills does not make them superior to women as they are also good at multitasking or working in groups. This implies that each gender has a weakness and requires the other for survival. Based on Kant’s principle of Humanity, the employer should treat his or her employees as a means to an end rather than simply as a means. Hence by wage discrimination against women implies that the employer is treating the female employees as a means to his or her ends whereby the employee is used as a tool for making a profit. Furthermore, Kant’s principle of university dictates that a relevant maxim has to be determined and be used as a universal law. As an employer, implementing this principle can diminish the productivity, efficiency, and motivation of women as they may not be rewarded based on work. In the long-run, the wage discrimination can create an agitated atmosphere at the expense of meritocracy. Ideally, failure to adhere to Kant’s principles is morally impermissible and goes against Kantian duties of progressing women’s skills and talents as well as being benevolent to others.
Objection and Response
Although it is unfair to base wages on uncontrollable factors such as gender, it is also unfair to have equal payments for the same jobs with different tasks particular when the commitment and efforts involved are different. It is obvious that whenever hard tasks emerge in an organization, men are allocated these tasks. Furthermore, when the tasks require a commitment regarding time, these are men who are assigned to cover the extra time while women are excused. It would be unfair and frustrating for the same women who were excused and assigned light tasks to get the same salary as the men who showed loyalty and commitment by accepting the hard tasks and extended long working hours. In fact, in most of the developed and middle-income countries, women earn 85% of what men who perform the same job earn (The Economist, 2017). Based on the social theory, the division of labor is most effective when based on sexual line as it bears overall societal well-being. Wage discrimination should not be a vice against women but rather an efficient method of allocating duties. Precisely, it would be unfair and frustrating for men if they received the same pay as women even if they have the same job.
Conclusion
Women should have equal work for equal pay not only because they are entitled to it but also because they have knowledge and expertise to reinforce their position in the workforce. Based on Kantian and utilitarian rules and principles the gender inclination should not be used as a determinant when it comes to wage allocation. Whatever task a man can perform, a woman with the same skills and expertise can also perform.

Reference
The Economist (October 7, 2017). The gender pay gap. Economist.com. retrieved (February 12, 2018) from https://www.economist.com/news/international/21729993-women-still-earn-lot-less-men-despite-decades-equal-pay-laws-why-gender